Dishing the Dirt

[ResilientBeast]

I'll just ignore another insult by yet another member and touch on your points:

I'm out to lunch on longevity on Gardiner? OK, whatever.

I guess I can't add at a 1st grade level or compare him to every other G during the same time period who all played longer. He doesn't get credit for dying at 29. Sorry. That's the constant for everyone. If you think playing 7 years = strong longevity, even for that era, I don't know what we have left to discuss on Gardiner.

And what is with the attempt to get special credit for dying as it relates to winning a SC? Does that somehow increase the value? Does it now mean he has 2, or 3 titles his his name? It's awful that he lost his life. I've said or done nothing to diminish the bad fortune.

So let's get down to it.

Bower's regular season in the AHL and NHL combined are superior to Gardiners 7 years in the NHL.

Right now, I have the 1950's AHL on par with 1960's Soviet hockey. Winning multiple league MVP's in mid to late 60's Soviet hockey + his regular season numbers with Toronto and accolades in the NHL = better than Gardiner.

I'll gladly wait for people other than you to tell me that the 1950's AHL wouldn't be able to compete with 1960's domestic Soviet hockey.

You talk about competition. I'll gladly wait for anyone other than you to tell me that the NHL, or goal tending specifically, in late 1920's/early 30's was superior to 1950's/60's NHL hockey. The 06 was so good you had multiple HOF'ers in the AHL for multiple years. HOF'ers superior to Thompson or Hainsworth or even Worters.

Bower has better Hart record, over better players.

I'll wait for someone other than you to tell me I'm wrong.

Bower has a better 1st team AS finish, over better goalies, ie comp.

Meaning his 1961 season is as good or better than anything Gardiner ever did, in any year. I'll wait for someone other than you to tell me I'm wrong. Again, remember who Bower was besting in net for awards and who he was getting more Hart votes than. I already named them.

Gardiner has better depth of finishes as an AS.

This is literally the only point clearly in favor of Gardiner, head to head.

Bower is far better in the postseason. 4 titles. 3 unquestioned as starter. You'll see below who he was helping defeat.

Nice stat: Bower literally has an many SC wins to his name as Gardiner has playoff appearances.

And yeah, as someone who preaches context, and relative values all the time, including this year, again, I'm aware of who Gardiner played for vs who Bower played for.

That does not remotely make up the difference. The domination Bower showed in the 60's, in the playoffs, consistently, again playing better than and beating players like Sawchuk (finals, twice) and Hall (finals) and Plante in the first round (once).

And that's completely ignoring his AHL playoff resume, which people are going to do, because it doesn't help their position, right now. Again, I'll wait for others to tell me I'm wrong.

Goalies Bower outperformed in the SCF's, all wins of course?

Glenn Hall (1962)
Terry Sawchuk (1963)
Terry Sawchuk (1964)

And he was doing this from his late 30's into his 40's, with arthritis and poor eyesight.

Hey, I get it. I'm only doing this to push an agenda though. I must have Bower ranked above Dryden by the end of the week!!!

In red bolded....because one played for a dynasty and the other the 30s Blackhawks

 

[ImporterExporter]

Come on, man. You'll calling Gardiner's 1st and 2nd team All-Star nods in the NHL "depth?"

It would take a lot to convince me that an AHL MVP is worth more than a 2nd Team All-Star nod in the NHL. Maybe in very specific circumstances, but not in general.

Bower was great in the playoffs no doubt.

Where did I call them "depth"

 

[ImporterExporter]

In red bolded....because one played for a dynasty and the other the 30s Blackhawks

Oh, so let me get this straight.

You think that 1 SC title is worth Bower's career, simply because Bower played on a better team?

Did you consider who Bower was beating vs Gardiner?

Bower was continually playing better than Plante, Hall, Sawchuk. Head to head. In the playoffs/finals.

Next.

 

[ResilientBeast]

Oh sorry you didn't want me to chime in.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Where did I call them "depth"

Depth of finishes.

You do realize that means more AS nods. He has more depth as an AS vote getter.

Carry on.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Oh sorry you didn't want me to chime in.

What? You are trying to equate a guy with one title vs a man with 4 by simply passing off Bower as a product of a dynasty.

If a single person says I'm wrong on this, I'll literally quit. Today.

 

[ResilientBeast]

What? You are trying to equate a guy with one title vs a man with 4 by simply passing off Bower as a product of a dynasty.

If a single person says I'm wrong on this, I'll literally quit. Today.

Wrong about what?

You're yelling about how much better Bower was in the playoffs. And your justification appears to amount to 4 > 1 ignoring team help.

Then you crow about longevity and say Gardiner has less longevity than his peers. No shit he died at his peak at age 29 after being ill the entire season before winning the Cup

Edit: Longevity is the reason I have Vezina and Benedict ahead of him.

 

[ResilientBeast]

Regardless I don't have a horse in this race, but I think you need to target other guys ranked above Bower in that project before going after Gardiner

The AHL stuff helps his case over some of those guys for sure,

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Where did I call them "depth"

"Gardiner has better depth of finishes as an AS.

This is literally the only point clearly in favor of Gardiner, head to head."

Gardiner's All-Star record in the NHL is way better than Bower's. Bower's NHL awards record is really not that good because he played so often in a tandem.

____

Maybe this is just an argument of semantics. To me a "depth finish" would be something like a 4th or 5th place finish.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Wrong about what?

You're yelling about how much better Bower was in the playoffs. And your justification appears to amount to 4 > 1 ignoring team help.

Then you crow about longevity and say Gardiner has less longevity than his peers. No shit he died at his peak at age 29 after being ill the entire season before winning the Cup

Edit: Longevity is the reason I have Vezina and Benedict ahead of him.

This is utter garbage. That's not at all what I have done. I'm actually doing research. Looking up AHL information so we can get a better idea of the quality of play. Some of that stuff doesn't even revolve around Bower!

I'm getting very sick and tired of the insults (why this whole thing started one, and then your "bad faith" shtick). I'm not taking anything personally regardless of what is said. Just pointing out how certain people are addressing one another.

Want to compare their statistics in the playoffs? Fine. It won't help your cause.

Frankly because Bower has a larger sample size, in a superior league, against superior peers, with his regular AND postseason numbers among the best in history. That was very much fleshed out in the top 200 project and why I started looking harder at Bower to begin with.

I'll say it again, Gardiner has 4 playoff appearances. Comparing him to almost any all time G is going to make him look very weak.

Want to compare who Bower was OUT PERFORMING in the playoffs AND SCF's? Fine. It won't help your cause.

Actually, oh wait. I already did this. I don't even need to look up who Gardiner beat head to head in the playoffs because it wasn't Glenn Hall, Terry Sawchuk or Jacques Plante.

Bower has AS nods over, Plante/Hall/Sawchuk (61, NHL), a recent Hart finalist Lumley (57, AHL), and Gerry McNeil (58, AHL). Some those names are better than all the G's in the late 20's/early 30's.

The Leafs were a dynasty, in part, because of Bower sir. I don't see them winning a slew of Cups before he and Red Kelley specifically showed up. Where were all those 50's title teams? How about post 67? Bower was specifically recruited by Punch Imlach to be his guy, even though Bower wanted little part of the NHL. His presence was a major reason why the Leafs were able to become a dynasty.

Acting like Bower is a product mainly of playing on a loaded team, as if he were some MLD level G, while ignoring who Bower was badly outperforming, in the playoffs, is a joke. Do you really think, on paper, the Leafs were the overwhelming best team in the 1960's? I don't know many who would. Deepest? Maybe but they were not the overwhelming best team of the decade, on paper.[/QUOTE]

 

[ResilientBeast]

This is utter garbage. That's not at all what I have done. I'm actually doing research. Looking up AHL information so we can get a better idea of the quality of play. Some of that stuff doesn't even revolve around Bower!

I'm getting very sick and tired of the insults (why this whole thing started one, and then your "bad faith" shtick). I'm not taking anything personally regardless of what is said. Just pointing out how certain people are addressing one another.

Want to compare their statistics in the playoffs? Fine. It won't help your cause.

Frankly because Bower has a larger sample size, in a superior league, against superior peers, with his regular AND postseason numbers among the best in history. That was very much fleshed out in the top 200 project and why I started looking harder at Bower to begin with.

I'll say it again, Gardiner has 4 playoff appearances. Comparing him to almost any all time G is going to make him look very weak.

Want to compare who Bower was OUT PERFORMING in the playoffs AND SCF's? Fine. It won't help your cause.

Actually, oh wait. I already did this. I don't even need to look up who Gardiner beat head to head in the playoffs because it wasn't Glenn Hall, Terry Sawchuk or Jacques Plante.

Bower has AS nods over, Plante/Hall/Sawchuk (61, NHL), a recent Hart finalist Lumley (57, AHL), and Gerry McNeil (58, AHL). Some those names are better than all the G's in the late 20's/early 30's.

The Leafs were a dynasty, in part, because of Bower sir. I don't see them winning a slew of Cups before he and Red Kelley specifically showed up. Where were all those 50's title teams? How about post 67? Bower was specifically recruited by Punch Imlach to be his guy, even though Bower wanted little part of the NHL. His presence was a major reason why the Leafs were able to become a dynasty.

Acting like Bower is a product mainly of playing on a loaded team, as if he were some MLD level G, while ignoring who Bower was badly outperforming, in the playoffs, is a joke. Do you really think, on paper, the Leafs were the overwhelming best team in the 1960's? I don't know many who would. Deepest? Maybe but they were not the overwhelming best team of the decade, on paper.

Lol nothing I said was insulting you

Edit: Not sure if referring to one argument as "bad faith" meets the requirements to be a "shtick" but go off

 

[ImporterExporter]

"Gardiner has better depth of finishes as an AS.

This is literally the only point clearly in favor of Gardiner, head to head."

Gardiner's All-Star record in the NHL is way better than Bower's. Bower's NHL awards record is really not that good because he played so often in a tandem.

____

Maybe this is just an argument of semantics. To me a "depth finish" would be something like a 4th or 5th place finish.

Poorly worded on my part, which is why I clarified right away.

I agree, Gardiner has a superior AS record. No doubt. That was my point though. Gardiner's AS record (depth of finishes, meaning placement/# of times he shows up) favors him certainly.

With that being said, his postseason record is very inferior to Bower's.

And peak Bower, a man who was voted 1st team AS over 3 of the top 6 goalies of all time, a runner up Hart placement (over Gordie Howe and Glenn Hall) is better than any single season by Gardiner. IMO.

Gardiner was the best regular season goalie in the world twice, maybe three times, in the early 30's.

Bower was on that level once, in a much, much tougher era, especially for goalies. You simply cannot compare beating out Worters to beating out Plante, Sawchuk, Hall.

Given the talent I've found to have played in the AHL, again, takes me to Bower essentially winning a league MVP in 1966 to 68 USSR, which is not nothing. This is regular season data added to Bower's overall resume.

Is it worth a 2nd team AS as a G in 1930's NHL? No, but I don't really think the gap is the grand canyon either. There's just too much talent in the AHL, namely at G in those MVP years, for me to think Bower's AHL resume was just him beating up on a bunch of nobodies.

 

[Dreakmur]

I think for Bowers AHL seasons, you have to look at the goalie he was stuck behind. His season in the AHL can't possibly be considered better than the NHL starter he was stuck behind. It would be one thing to be stuck behind Jacques Plante or Glenn Hall, but being stuck behind Gump Worsley is a much different story.

 

[ResilientBeast]

I get it, he died young. So did other stars who probably lost out on a HOF career (Scott Davidson comes to mind right off the bat). Gardiner doesn't have great longevity. Just as Bower didn't looking his NHL record. If you're going to punish the Bower's of the world, how can we not punish Gardiner for playing less than the other best G's of the time?

This is the very definition of a bad faith argument

His longevity is short because he literally died winning the cup not because he wasn't a quality goaltender. So saying his longevity wasn't great is factual but penalizing him even more than most of us do is in bad faith. His competition at the time is Thompson, Worters & Hainsworth, and AST voting shows that Gardiner > Worters > Hainsworth/Thompson

Bower dominated the AHL but through whatever personal/professional etc reasons could not get into the NHL that also has to mean something.

You referenced Scotty Davidson earlier in the thread. Davidson is raved about by his contemporaries but he only has 2 seasons in the NHA and that's it and it's impossible to get a read on a career that short, but Gardiner's situation is clearly different.

You've presented a lot of information which is always helpful, but I'm unsure if Bower is even better than Roy Worters.

 

[ImporterExporter]

I think for Bowers AHL seasons, you have to look at the goalie he was stuck behind. His season in the AHL can't possibly be considered better than the NHL starter he was stuck behind. It would be one thing to be stuck behind Jacques Plante or Glenn Hall, but being stuck behind Gump Worsley is a much different story.

It's not like Bower was winning awards over Baz Bastian. He was a unanimous AS over Harry Lumley, who 2 years previously was a Hart runner up in the NHL. Both similarly aged.

If Hugh Lehamn can be trotted out with his early PCHA AS's over the likes of Tom Murray, then I absolutely think using Bower's nod over a HOF'er like Harry Lumley is worthy of recognition.

I think the 06 AHL, specfically 50's was probably pretty similarly skilled to the 60's Soviet top league with goalie and defensemen being easily in favor of the North American side of things and forwards favoring the Soviets.

Thus, I would look at his AS wins and MVP's like he was winning them in the USSR, circa, 1965-68.

Add that to what he did in Toronto and I don't see how that's miles, let alone a stone's throw behind a 7 year NHL career, 4 AS's and 1 SC win with the best competition in net being Roy Worters. That vs Plante, and Sawchuk, and Hall, and Lumley, so on and so forth.

I'm sure I'd rank Bower over every goalie he came in behind this year (Lundqvist, Worters, Espo) and I definitely see a case for him over Belfour while being in the same general tier as Broda, Benedict, Gardiner, not in any specific order. That's where I'm at today. If that makes me a shill, so be it.

There's no way I'd ever put him over or on the level of Vezina/Brimsek. That's the next tier up and he's not going there, even if you're overly generous to his AHL years.

Basically it boils down to the AHL tenure. If you think it a bush league, you're probably not going to lose the cement shoes. If you look at it in the light that I do (see above), it's worth something and there are many years of something.

 

[ResilientBeast]

It's not like Bower was winning awards over Baz Bastian. He was a unanimous AS over Harry Lumley, who 2 years previously was a Hart runner up in the NHL. Both similarly aged.

If Hugh Lehamn can be trotted out with his early PCHA AS's over the likes of Tom Murray, then I absolutely think using Bower's nod over a HOF'er like Harry Lumley is worthy of recognition.

I think the 06 AHL, specfically 50's was probably pretty similarly skilled to the 60's Soviet top league with goalie and defensemen being easily in favor of the North American side of things and forwards favoring the Soviets.

Thus, I would look at his AS wins and MVP's like he was winning them in the USSR, circa, 1965-68.

Add that to what he did in Toronto and I don't see how that's miles, let alone a stone's throw behind a 7 year NHL career, 4 AS's and 1 SC win with the best competition in net being Roy Worters. That vs Plante, and Sawchuk, and Hall, and Lumley, so on and so forth.

I'm sure I'd rank Bower over every goalie he came in behind this year (Lundqvist, Worters, Espo) and I definitely see a case for him over Belfour while being in the same general tier as Broda, Benedict, Gardiner, not in any specific order. That's where I'm at today. If that makes me a shill, so be it.

There's no way I'd ever put him over or on the level of Vezina/Brimsek. That's the next tier up and he's not going there, even if you're overly generous to his AHL years.

Basically it boils down to the AHL tenure. If you think it a bush league, you're probably not going to lose the cement shoes. If you look at it in the light that I do (see above), it's worth something and there are many years of something.

Yes but by this point Lumely appears to be past his prime, his GAA inflates nearly a full goal per game from that in his Hart runner up.

Just saying he beat Lumely doesn't mean anything since Lumely statistically wasn't the same goalie anymore by the time he was in the AHL or he would've still played in the NHL

Bower has an exceptionally weird aging curve I'll give you that.

 

[ImporterExporter]

This is the very definition of a bad faith argument

His longevity is short because he literally died winning the cup not because he wasn't a quality goaltender. So saying his longevity wasn't great is factual but penalizing him even more than most of us do is in bad faith. His competition at the time is Thompson, Worters & Hainsworth, and AST voting shows that Gardiner > Worters > Hainsworth/Thompson

Bower dominated the AHL but through whatever personal/professional etc reasons could not get into the NHL that also has to mean something.

You referenced Scotty Davidson earlier in the thread. Davidson is raved about by his contemporaries but he only has 2 seasons in the NHA and that's it and it's impossible to get a read on a career that short, but Gardiner's situation is clearly different.

You've presented a lot of information which is always helpful, but I'm unsure if Bower is even better than Roy Worters.

No it's not. You're inventing an alternate reality where players who unfortunately die somehow get to skip the longevity scrutiny. He died. He doesn't get credit for stuff he may have done had he lived. That's open and shut. So let's move on about him dying early. He's not an anomaly in this regard.

So yeah, his longevity sucks compared to his peers in that time period. It sucks because he died (value and losing his life) but the fact remains. He played 7 years. It's not great but is what it is.

You bring up a handful of goalies who almost all universally rank outside the top 20 all time.

Time periods with better goal tending than late 20's and early 30's?

The 1910's/20's (Vezina, Benedict, Lehman, Holmes).
The 1940's (Brimsek, Broda, Durnan, Rayner)
50's (obvious),
60's (obvious),
70's (Dryden, Parent, Espo, Giacomin, Vachon)
90's into the early 2000's (obvious)

Not to mention the late 20's and early 30's goaltenders enjoyed playing in or among the lowest scoring seasons in the history of the league. Let's not forget about that little nugget. Bower came into a league that was pushing 3 goals score a game, as much as a full goal more than the late 20's/early 30's.

NHL League Averages | Hockey-Reference.com

Bower played in an era with Plante, Hall, and Sawchuk and made them look inferior, in the NHL, namely in the postseason but once in the regular season as well.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Yes but by this point Lumely appears to be past his prime, his GAA inflates nearly a full goal per game from that in his Hart runner up.

Just saying he beat Lumely doesn't mean anything since Lumely statistically wasn't the same goalie anymore by the time he was in the AHL or he would've still played in the NHL

Bower has an exceptionally weird aging curve I'll give you that.

OK, then, we'll play that game of just dismissing things outright.

Neither does Lehman beating Tom Murray and any G not named Hap Holmes for AS honors in non consolidated league, by the opinion of 1 man to boot. If that is going to get tacked up top every time we see a Lehman bio, then winning AS nods over Lumley and McNeil and a 20 year old Glenn Hall seem just as worthy to me.

So you can either make some concessions, like I have done on Lehman, or dig your heels in. You have those options.

Do you honestly expect people to believe that anyone in the PCHA not named Hap Holmes was better than a 32 year old, 06 era, HOF goalie (Lumley)? Maybe Bert Lindsay and Tom Murray were better goalies than that. I have no idea, but I doubt it.

Hell, let's take it a step further. If you consolidated the PCHA and NHA/NHL, you can make a case Lehamn would have never won an AS nod, certainly a strong one that most of those AS nods he won in the west, would be gone if you bring Vezina and Benedict into the equation. Is that not a logical conclusion?

Getting back to Lumley, he went back to the NHL (Boston) for 3 years after his AHL season i mentioned. He was clearly still good enough to goal tend at the NHL level. Lumley at 32, is a lot better than Baz Bastian. If the latter was the only type of player in the AHL in the 1950's or 60's this conversation wouldn't even be happening. Nobody would even bring it up if the league was filled with bums. It wasn't though.

Hence the entire point of trying to figure out how underrated the AHL is. That's why I dug up all the AHL AS rosters from 46 to 66. It's why I spent hours and hours looking up NHL'ers who played in both leagues, got AS votes, or shares, etc.

The main mission should be coming to a consensus about where we place the AHL, post WWII through the end of the 06 era, relative to other non NHL leagues. I've said it likely mirror 60's Soviet hockey or 1900, through early 1910's hockey. I'd genuinely love to hear what others think here.

Once we have a general opinion on the league's value, we can then cement a better legacy for Bower in that league and tie it into his all time standing.

 

[Dreakmur]

It's not like Bower was winning awards over Baz Bastian. He was a unanimous AS over Harry Lumley, who 2 years previously was a Hart runner up in the NHL. Both similarly aged.

If Hugh Lehamn can be trotted out with his early PCHA AS's over the likes of Tom Murray, then I absolutely think using Bower's nod over a HOF'er like Harry Lumley is worthy of recognition.

I think the 06 AHL, specfically 50's was probably pretty similarly skilled to the 60's Soviet top league with goalie and defensemen being easily in favor of the North American side of things and forwards favoring the Soviets.

Thus, I would look at his AS wins and MVP's like he was winning them in the USSR, circa, 1965-68.

Add that to what he did in Toronto and I don't see how that's miles, let alone a stone's throw behind a 7 year NHL career, 4 AS's and 1 SC win with the best competition in net being Roy Worters. That vs Plante, and Sawchuk, and Hall, and Lumley, so on and so forth.

I'm sure I'd rank Bower over every goalie he came in behind this year (Lundqvist, Worters, Espo) and I definitely see a case for him over Belfour while being in the same general tier as Broda, Benedict, Gardiner, not in any specific order. That's where I'm at today. If that makes me a shill, so be it.

There's no way I'd ever put him over or on the level of Vezina/Brimsek. That's the next tier up and he's not going there, even if you're overly generous to his AHL years.

Basically it boils down to the AHL tenure. If you think it a bush league, you're probably not going to lose the cement shoes. If you look at it in the light that I do (see above), it's worth something and there are many years of something.

The AHL was a very good league.... but if Bower was better than his team’s NHL goalie, he would have been in the NHL.

If you assume the top 6 goalies are all in the NHL, that would mean the best AHL goalie was likely the 7th or 8th best goalie in the world. That’s pretty good - equivalent to a top-10 in all star voting for me.

Odds are there were a few seasons that the 5th or 6th best goalie was stuck in the AHL behind somebody like Glenn Hall. Bower was often stuck behind Gump Worsley, who was usually the 5th or 6th beat goalie in the NHL, so the odds of Bower being any higher that 7/8 is very unlikely.

As I’ve said before, I can’t see those AHL seasons worth anything more than “quality longevity” seasons, but that’s what I think they are. He’s got a decent peak and good longevity.

 

[ResilientBeast]

OK, then, we'll play that game of just dismissing things outright.

Neither does Lehman beating Tom Murray and any G not named Hap Holmes for AS honors in non consolidated league, by the opinion of 1 man to boot. If that is going to get tacked up top every time we see a Lehman bio, then winning AS nods over Lumley and McNeil and a 20 year old Glenn Hall seem just as worthy to me.

So you can either make some concessions, like I have done on Lehman, or dig your heels in. You have those options.

Do you honestly expect people to believe that anyone in the PCHA not named Hap Holmes was better than a 32 year old, 06 era, HOF goalie (Lumley)? Maybe Bert Lindsay and Tom Murray were better goalies than that. I have no idea, but I doubt it.

Hell, let's take it a step further. If you consolidated the PCHA and NHA/NHL, you can make a case Lehamn would have never won an AS nod, certainly a strong one that most of those AS nods he won in the west, would be gone if you bring Vezina and Benedict into the equation. Is that not a logical conclusion?

Getting back to Lumley, he went back to the NHL (Boston) for 3 years after his AHL season i mentioned. He was clearly still good enough to goal tend at the NHL level. Lumley at 32, is a lot better than Baz Bastian. If the latter was the only type of player in the AHL in the 1950's or 60's this conversation wouldn't even be happening. Nobody would even bring it up if the league was filled with bums. It wasn't though.

Hence the entire point of trying to figure out how underrated the AHL is. That's why I dug up all the AHL AS rosters from 46 to 66. It's why I spent hours and hours looking up NHL'ers who played in both leagues, got AS votes, or shares, etc.

The main mission should be coming to a consensus about where we place the AHL, post WWII through the end of the 06 era, relative to other non NHL leagues. I've said it likely mirror 60's Soviet hockey or 1900, through early 1910's hockey. I'd genuinely love to hear what others think here.

Once we have a general opinion on the league's value, we can then cement a better legacy for Bower in that league and tie it into his all time standing.

The AHL was a very good league.... but if Bower was better than his team’s NHL goalie, he would have been in the NHL.

If you assume the top 6 goalies are all in the NHL, that would mean the best AHL goalie was likely the 7th or 8th best goalie in the world. That’s pretty good - equivalent to a top-10 in all star voting for me.

Odds are there were a few seasons that the 5th or 6th best goalie was stuck in the AHL behind somebody like Glenn Hall. Bower was often stuck behind Gump Worsley, who was usually the 5th or 6th beat goalie in the NHL, so the odds of Bower being any higher that 7/8 is very unlikely.

As I’ve said before, I can’t see those AHL seasons worth anything more than “quality longevity” seasons, but that’s what I think they are. He’s got a decent peak and good longevity.

Just to be clear @ImporterExporter I totally agree with Dreakmurs's take above here.

But that doesn't make me reconsider Bower vs Gardiner

 

[ImporterExporter]

The AHL was a very good league.... but if Bower was better than his team’s NHL goalie, he would have been in the NHL.

If you assume the top 6 goalies are all in the NHL, that would mean the best AHL goalie was likely the 7th or 8th best goalie in the world. That’s pretty good - equivalent to a top-10 in all star voting for me.

Odds are there were a few seasons that the 5th or 6th best goalie was stuck in the AHL behind somebody like Glenn Hall. Bower was often stuck behind Gump Worsley, who was usually the 5th or 6th beat goalie in the NHL, so the odds of Bower being any higher that 7/8 is very unlikely.

As I’ve said before, I can’t see those AHL seasons worth anything more than “quality longevity” seasons, but that’s what I think they are. He’s got a decent peak and good longevity.

I don't think it was entirely about him not being good enough, especially when you read about how hard it was to get him out of the AHL when Imlach managed to get him to Toronto.

With that being said, I don't disagree with anything you're saying.

2 specific questions for you and anyone else that cares to chime in.

1. If he has a decent peak and good longevity, how does that come in as inferior to good peak/below average longevity (Gardiner)? And that's without even factoring in the disparity in playoff resumes between the two.

I just don't get it. Then again, I'm not a big fan of goalies in the late 20's/early 30's, or the fact they played in such a depressed scoring environment. As I showed above, it's not a good era for goal tenders, relative to other decades.

The only counter to this is basically, "he died young" and "he didn't play on a dynasty". I'll never understand how anyone can put this guy in the same breath as someone like Vezina, who blows Gardiner away in longevity, played on many porous defensive teams, and his peak is also superior IMO, though not as drastically so as longevity. And Vezina is again, a better playoff goalie. Same thing with Benedict, though I know some will simply trot out the 20's dynasty angle, which has some teeth, but Benedict also had some great seasons outside Pete Green's defensive system. Both of those men have so much meat on their resume. Peak, longevity, playoff dominance and they feature well in retrospectives by people who watched them actually play.

And people put 4 AS, 1 meaningful Hart vote (7th) and 1 SC win in that same breath, or at least ball park. Gardiner either needed an entire 7 years of domination in the regular season or much more meat in the playoffs for me to think him worthy of even being discussed next to Vezina and Benedict. Maybe I'm about the only person who sees it this way.

Let me also ask you this since no one else seems interested in answering.

2. Do you think his AS nods and MVP's in the AHL are worth more/less/same than a PCHA AS vote made by one person? Especially in years that saw no ATD, or MLD level goalies to compete with for said AS votes.

 

[ResilientBeast]

I don't think it was entirely about him not being good enough, especially when you read about how hard it was to get him out of the AHL when Imlach managed to get him to Toronto.

With that being said, I don't disagree with anything you're saying.

2 specific questions for you and anyone else that cares to chime in.

1. If he has a decent peak and good longevity, how does that come in as inferior to good peak/below average longevity (Gardiner)? And that's without even factoring in the disparity in playoff resumes between the two.

I just don't get it. Then again, I'm not a big fan of goalies in the late 20's/early 30's, or the fact they played in such a depressed scoring environment. As I showed above, it's not a good era for goal tenders, relative to other decades.

The only counter to this is basically, "he died young" and "he didn't play on a dynasty". I'll never understand how anyone can put this guy in the same breath as someone like Vezina, who blows Gardiner away in longevity, played on many porous defensive teams, and his peak is also superior IMO, though not as drastically so as longevity. And Vezina is again, a better playoff goalie. Same thing with Benedict, though I know some will simply trot out the 20's dynasty angle, which has some teeth, but Benedict also had some great seasons outside Pete Green's defensive system. Both of those men have so much meat on their resume. Peak, longevity, playoff dominance and they feature well in retrospectives by people who watched them actually play.

And people put 4 AS, 1 meaningful Hart vote (7th) and 1 SC win in that same breath, or at least ball park. Gardiner either needed an entire 7 years of domination in the regular season or much more meat in the playoffs for me to think him worthy of even being discussed next to Vezina and Benedict. Maybe I'm about the only person who sees it this way.

Let me also ask you this since no one else seems interested in answering.

2. Do you think his AS nods and MVP's in the AHL are worth more/less/same than a PCHA AS vote made by one person? Especially in years that saw no ATD, or MLD level goalies to compete with for said AS votes.

To the bolded I've provided enough quotes to substantiate Lehman's greatness outside of just listing PCHA AS teams.

Mickey Ion thought that he was the best in the league during his career annually (almost) and the newspaper clippings of his greatness speak to that as well.

And like I said that lack of longevity is the reason he's behind Vezina and Benedict for me.

Edit: Not sure why you're so happy to drive by on Lehman, but I can post as many quotes as you can showing he was clearly thought of as part of the Vezina/Benedict class out east while Holmes was not.

 

[Dreakmur]

I don't think it was entirely about him not being good enough, especially when you read about how hard it was to get him out of the AHL when Imlach managed to get him to Toronto.

With that being said, I don't disagree with anything you're saying.

2 specific questions for you and anyone else that cares to chime in.

1. If he has a decent peak and good longevity, how does that come in as inferior to good peak/below average longevity (Gardiner)? And that's without even factoring in the disparity in playoff resumes between the two.

I just don't get it. Then again, I'm not a big fan of goalies in the late 20's/early 30's, or the fact they played in such a depressed scoring environment. As I showed above, it's not a good era for goal tenders, relative to other decades.

The only counter to this is basically, "he died young" and "he didn't play on a dynasty". I'll never understand how anyone can put this guy in the same breath as someone like Vezina, who blows Gardiner away in longevity, played on many porous defensive teams, and his peak is also superior IMO, though not as drastically so as longevity. And Vezina is again, a better playoff goalie. Same thing with Benedict, though I know some will simply trot out the 20's dynasty angle, which has some teeth, but Benedict also had some great seasons outside Pete Green's defensive system. Both of those men have so much meat on their resume. Peak, longevity, playoff dominance and they feature well in retrospectives by people who watched them actually play.

And people put 4 AS, 1 meaningful Hart vote (7th) and 1 SC win in that same breath, or at least ball park. Gardiner either needed an entire 7 years of domination in the regular season or much more meat in the playoffs for me to think him worthy of even being discussed next to Vezina and Benedict. Maybe I'm about the only person who sees it this way.

Let me also ask you this since no one else seems interested in answering.

2. Do you think his AS nods and MVP's in the AHL are worth more/less/same than a PCHA AS vote made by one person? Especially in years that saw no ATD, or MLD level goalies to compete with for said AS votes.

1. Gardiner, I think, peaked much higher than Bower. I honestly haven’t compared them extensively, but my impression of Gardiner was that he was a borderline MVP candidate for a number of years. 1st place in all-star voting isn’t always equal.

2. I put zero weight in the PCHA all-star voting, since those teams were selected by a single person - Mickey Ion. He would know those players well, being a referee, but one person’s opinion is always tainted with bias.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Just to be clear @ImporterExporter I totally agree with Dreakmurs's take above here.

But that doesn't make me reconsider Bower vs Gardiner

1. Gardiner played in weaker era, against weaker competition head to head, by a lot. Bower bested Plante, Sawchuk, Hall. Doing that once in the regular season and multiple times in the playoffs is worth Gardiner besting Worters, Thompson, Hainsworth a few times in the regular season. You don't agree? Great. We're not robots. I'll wait to see what other reputable members of the HoH section have to say

2. Regular season peak favors Gardiner

3. AS voting favors Gardiner

4. Hart voting favors Bower

5. Regular season longevity favors Bower

6. Playoffs favor Bower

Gardiner is the most overrated goalie that gets placed in the top 20. Easily. I'd love to see the argument for his regular season resume over Tony Esposito's. There isn't one as far as I'm concerned and Tony has much better AS/Hart data. His regular season resume is vastly better than Gardiners, and Gardiner doesn't make up the ground with 1 SC either.

4 AS
1 SC
7th place Hart voting

That's it. That's the entirety of his ATD worthy accomplishments.

You can spin it however you want. Didn't play on a dynasty. Died at 29.

Esposito in a tougher era (Dryden, Parent, Giacomin, Vachon, etc) with far more scoring:

5 AS nods (over some of the names up there)
Hart record of 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 9, 11

Like I said, you either have to give an insane value to 1 SC or think that Espo was playing a career on loaded rosters, weaker era, to come up with the idea Gardiner, based solely on what he did, not what he might have magically done had he lived, is better.

What IS on record is not worth of being placed where he is. I've said my piece. I'm done.

 

[ImporterExporter]

1. Gardiner, I think, peaked much higher than Bower. I honestly haven’t compared them extensively, but my impression of Gardiner was that he was a borderline MVP candidate for a number of years. 1st place in all-star voting isn’t always equal.

2. I put zero weight in the PCHA all-star voting, since those teams were selected by a single person - Mickey Ion. He would know those players well, being a referee, but one person’s opinion is always tainted with bias.

1. Really?

Bower literally was a Hart runner up over Gordie Howe and Glenn Hall, among many other top flight HOF'ers, well into his 30's by that point. In 1961 Bower was the best goalie in the world. That is better than being the best goalie in the world at any point during Gardiner's tenure. You (anyone) cannot be serious Gardiner peaked as a goalie capable of outperforming 3 of the top 6 goalies of all time and a 32 year old Gordie Howe. It's too much.

Gardiner was not a borderline MVP candidate. He was never even a finalist (once, 7th). Unless of course people think the voters were out to screw him or inept which there is no basis for especially considering Roy Worters managed a Hart win on a really crappy team, as well as numerous other finishes that are better than Gardiner's.

2. Good. Then we can stop bringing them up as if they mean anything here or in the HoH section.

Thank you for the response bud.